These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Destruction Testing the New Wardec System (Ganks Included - Free wardec inside)

First post
Author
Ben Youssef Noban
Doomheim
#421 - 2012-07-13 02:45:48 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:

Ben Youssef Noban wrote:
I am upset to see that Lord Zim has told untruth here to try to win argument. What say you to allegation that fixes were actually proposed to this mechanic that you said were not made?

I've already said I was wrong, I'd forgotten about a few suggestions which were hidden amongst posts of people (like jade) taking the express train to mount tinfoil and then actually start making suggestions.


I did not see you apologise for your error Lord Zim. If you were as verbose with your apology when you get things wrong as you are verbose with your posts when you belief you are right then I think more would have time for your opinions. In this case there are more than "a few suggestion" there are many, and you do a grave disservice to forum readers to pretend there were not.

I think you have become a little obssessed with Jade Constantine in this thread. Is clear she believes one way and you belief another. Both of you have arguments, some of merit, but now you are arguing only for sake of argument and not because you will convince the other. Is like addiction to you no ?



Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#422 - 2012-07-13 13:51:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jade Constantine
Lord Zim wrote:
I've already said I was wrong, I'd forgotten about a few suggestions which were hidden amongst posts of people (like jade) taking the express train to mount tinfoil and then actually start making suggestions.


Second page of the first thread on 1.1 I made a proposal to resolve the issue here No suggestions were "hidden" and this proposal was generally praised by most independents in the discussion thread. CCP's only substantive objective to it was "wars in eve aren't meant to be fair" - which is ironic given that the fairness to "mercs" and 0.0 alliances getting dogpiled were the major factors cited for the 1.1 change.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#423 - 2012-07-13 16:09:24 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
I've already said I was wrong, I'd forgotten about a few suggestions which were hidden amongst posts of people (like jade) taking the express train to mount tinfoil and then actually start making suggestions.


Second page of the first thread on 1.1 I made a proposal to resolve the issue here No suggestions were "hidden" and this proposal was generally praised by most independents in the discussion thread. CCP's only substantive objective to it was "wars in eve aren't meant to be fair" - which is ironic given that the fairness to "mercs" and 0.0 alliances getting dogpiled were the major factors cited for the 1.1 change.



Mercs and 0.0 alliances = Everyone who made an offensive wardec. Sure, OK. There definitely weren't corps out there who were allies in 30, 50, 70 wars. No, it's just GSF and TEST complaining that enacted this change.

No, this doesn't sound hysterical at all.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#424 - 2012-07-13 17:17:44 UTC
Kyle Myr wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
I've already said I was wrong, I'd forgotten about a few suggestions which were hidden amongst posts of people (like jade) taking the express train to mount tinfoil and then actually start making suggestions.


Second page of the first thread on 1.1 I made a proposal to resolve the issue here No suggestions were "hidden" and this proposal was generally praised by most independents in the discussion thread. CCP's only substantive objective to it was "wars in eve aren't meant to be fair" - which is ironic given that the fairness to "mercs" and 0.0 alliances getting dogpiled were the major factors cited for the 1.1 change.



Mercs and 0.0 alliances = Everyone who made an offensive wardec. Sure, OK. There definitely weren't corps out there who were allies in 30, 50, 70 wars. No, it's just GSF and TEST complaining that enacted this change.


Merc's and 0.0 alliances were the people cited as being aided by this change. As for other circumstances of wardec including small entities who were getting "dog-piled" by many when they declare war those would be covered in the suggestions players made to reform the 1.0 system that were discounted by CCP Soundwave on the grounds that "war is not meant to be fair." You really can't have it both ways in this argument Kyle Myr.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#425 - 2012-07-13 19:34:05 UTC
There's a vast difference between "it's not fair" and "nobody'll wardec anyone ever again".

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Krystalline Meth
Doomheim
#426 - 2012-07-14 02:48:19 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
There's a vast difference between "it's not fair" and "nobody'll wardec anyone ever again".


Lol u really saying that with Inferno nobody would ever wardec anyone again?. U must be tripping or putting on tinfoil hats urself. U are pretty bad at forum discussions duder. Nobody was gonna stop wardeccing because more people would get involved in wars. This is a game and wars are fun. People want wars and want people to fight - u trying to shut down wars jus because your alliance was loosing is weak sauce on soggy chips.
Valoche Mrehl
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#427 - 2012-07-17 14:19:08 UTC
Posting in a thread that delivers!
Valoche Mrehl
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#428 - 2012-07-17 14:52:08 UTC
In a multipost style that seems popular I would like to give my opinion as an anonymous entity without any evidence based soley on what I've read here (I didn't listen to any podcast or read any devblogs.. who has time?) and my own personal experiences in the Universe of EVE Online.

LOL

I used to fly with a Goon director. In 2008. He was richer than the couple guys I knew with t2 ship bpos. He had a personal moon splurging out R64 that he could throw away 20b faction BS in 20 v 1 fights in lowsec on an alt. Literally throw them away and not care. True, that's personality, but you need riches to do that and in 2008, well, there were not so many legitimate faucets. Goonswarm might have been poor, but there were hugely wealthy Goons and not just 1 or 2. Have no evidence to offer for this outside my experiences (sorry bros, I only keep 24 months worth of daily frap and vent recordings. Records dont go back that far).

Ergo, Goons were sucking on the moon-goo teet at least 4 years ago.

I used to be a new player. It took me MONTHS to earn the isk for +3's (was like 50m?) because I could only play about 5 hours a week and an osprey don't mine too quickly and lvl 2's just didn't bank as you'd hope. We got involved in a couple wars vs other n00b miners out in derelik. One guy had a drake. That sucked to fight, but we had a blast and could manage the 2mil np for our e-honors. If that wardec was 50m, would have never happened and I wouldn't have started pvping when I did and started the beautiful toon you see before you now.

Cost should NOT be a debilitating factor in gameplay. Rewards can be restricted, but not mainline gameplay features. That's ********, or do you think casual players (that don't have a few hours to run lvl 4's so they can fund a war) should just go find another game with more instant gratification?

1.0 war mechanics seem kinda ****** up in that organizations like the Privateers could be involved in 50+ simultaneous wars(have not fact checked, but someone refered to A corp with this many). That is a broken mechanic.

That is all that is broken. Unlimited allies in Defense and unbreakable mutual war is AWESOME. Absolutely brilliant for the game and Jade's original post (I think, his declaration and original invite) summed up the possibilities so well. A 9000 man nullsec STATE coming into the Empire with bloody intentions and getting all Jihad'd up. And that's exactly what it is like. Some group getting attacked/violently repressed and a swarm (lol) of sympathizers come in to help.

My kneejerk reaction was that as soon as a war was mutual all allies should drop, but that doesn't dig with the real world at all. True, EVE is not the real world, but (as Jade has mentioned) why hamstring player efforts with unnecessary restrictions on mechanics. If you start a fight with a midget, you can't just be "Sorry bro!" when 12 more midgets come out of the woodwork and kick your shins off. You fight until its over, but in EVE, that's no solution.

Solution: 1.0 war mechanics with 2 changes:

1.) A corporation/alliance can only be involved in X offensive wars at a time. A corporation/alliance cannot join a defensive war while engaged in any offensive war or as an ally (not primary defender) of a defensive action.

2.) A war will be declared invalid if no kills have been recorded in a billing cycle.

Stops long term griefing wars from driving away customers (a crutch, but if a corp stops playing for 2 weeks to escape a war, well... that's 1/2 a gtc in damage to each of them at least [kinda]) and prevents some corp from declaring war, keeping it up and locking a corp in perpetual war without actual trying to execute an offensive.

Anyway, Great Thread. Goons delivering as expected: loads of trash.

To (try) not to be a Jade fanboy (come to amamake, pinata!!) know that some (many) of your posts are absolutely cringe worthy. You need to work on your facts a bit, stop assuming we all read EVERYTHING you post and, well... rein the rhetoric in a wee bit. It's pretty awesome during speeches, less so when defending points of fact or opinion.

\o/
whaynethepain
#429 - 2012-07-18 10:33:44 UTC
Yea, the War-Dec system is a little crazy.

Agreed, there should be a small admin charge and delay to process a war declaration, but the rest of the pricing mathematical costing is just pure mind boggling, over complicating a perfectly good feature.

As for making it mutual, all that means is it's a fight to the bone then, pods and all, fighting in stations perhaps, fighting for trade embargo's, maybe convince Corcord to help out for LP, dunno. But there should probably be a million or two charge and a few mins clicking to be sure.

The War-Dec system is a really good feature overall, and I realised how fun the PVP is, after once having a high-sec corp 'deced, it really opened Eve-Online up more to me and presented much more of the game to me.

Perhaps any corp should have the potential to to war-dec any other corp easily, allowing for the ship aggression feature.

But these aggressors should be weary of the industrial might, Security status and standings power of the carebear entrepreneurs ready for a mutual war.

Getting you on your feet.

So you've further to fall.

Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#430 - 2012-07-22 10:28:51 UTC
how about putting war to mutual and changing corp?
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#431 - 2012-07-27 16:22:07 UTC
Valoche Mrehl wrote:
In a multipost style that seems popular I would like to give my opinion as an anonymous entity without any evidence based soley on what I've read here (I didn't listen to any podcast or read any devblogs.. who has time?) and my own personal experiences in the Universe of EVE Online.

LOL

I used to fly with a Goon director. In 2008. He was richer than the couple guys I knew with t2 ship bpos. He had a personal moon splurging out R64 that he could throw away 20b faction BS in 20 v 1 fights in lowsec on an alt. Literally throw them away and not care. True, that's personality, but you need riches to do that and in 2008, well, there were not so many legitimate faucets. Goonswarm might have been poor, but there were hugely wealthy Goons and not just 1 or 2. Have no evidence to offer for this outside my experiences (sorry bros, I only keep 24 months worth of daily frap and vent recordings. Records dont go back that far).

Ergo, Goons were sucking on the moon-goo teet at least 4 years ago.

I used to be a new player. It took me MONTHS to earn the isk for +3's (was like 50m?) because I could only play about 5 hours a week and an osprey don't mine too quickly and lvl 2's just didn't bank as you'd hope. We got involved in a couple wars vs other n00b miners out in derelik. One guy had a drake. That sucked to fight, but we had a blast and could manage the 2mil np for our e-honors. If that wardec was 50m, would have never happened and I wouldn't have started pvping when I did and started the beautiful toon you see before you now.

Cost should NOT be a debilitating factor in gameplay. Rewards can be restricted, but not mainline gameplay features. That's ********, or do you think casual players (that don't have a few hours to run lvl 4's so they can fund a war) should just go find another game with more instant gratification?

1.0 war mechanics seem kinda ****** up in that organizations like the Privateers could be involved in 50+ simultaneous wars(have not fact checked, but someone refered to A corp with this many). That is a broken mechanic.

That is all that is broken. Unlimited allies in Defense and unbreakable mutual war is AWESOME. Absolutely brilliant for the game and Jade's original post (I think, his declaration and original invite) summed up the possibilities so well. A 9000 man nullsec STATE coming into the Empire with bloody intentions and getting all Jihad'd up. And that's exactly what it is like. Some group getting attacked/violently repressed and a swarm (lol) of sympathizers come in to help.

My kneejerk reaction was that as soon as a war was mutual all allies should drop, but that doesn't dig with the real world at all. True, EVE is not the real world, but (as Jade has mentioned) why hamstring player efforts with unnecessary restrictions on mechanics. If you start a fight with a midget, you can't just be "Sorry bro!" when 12 more midgets come out of the woodwork and kick your shins off. You fight until its over, but in EVE, that's no solution.

Solution: 1.0 war mechanics with 2 changes:

1.) A corporation/alliance can only be involved in X offensive wars at a time. A corporation/alliance cannot join a defensive war while engaged in any offensive war or as an ally (not primary defender) of a defensive action.

2.) A war will be declared invalid if no kills have been recorded in a billing cycle.

Stops long term griefing wars from driving away customers (a crutch, but if a corp stops playing for 2 weeks to escape a war, well... that's 1/2 a gtc in damage to each of them at least [kinda]) and prevents some corp from declaring war, keeping it up and locking a corp in perpetual war without actual trying to execute an offensive.

Anyway, Great Thread. Goons delivering as expected: loads of trash.

To (try) not to be a Jade fanboy (come to amamake, pinata!!) know that some (many) of your posts are absolutely cringe worthy. You need to work on your facts a bit, stop assuming we all read EVERYTHING you post and, well... rein the rhetoric in a wee bit. It's pretty awesome during speeches, less so when defending points of fact or opinion.

\o/


I troll the forums all day at work as a teacher and this might single handily the best forum post I've read.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com